The big news this week comes from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California. The traditionally (notoriously?) left-leaning federal court delivered its second pro-gun ruling in as many weeks, and pundits on both sides of the gun control debate are losing their minds. Today, I want to spend a minute breaking down what this ruling actually means, and where we go from here.
On Tuesday, a 3-judge panel of the court announced its decision in the case of Young v. Hawaii. The State of Hawaii requires citizens to apply for a county-issued license before they may openly carry firearms in public. The plaintiff in this case had applied for a license and been denied twice. He argued that the state's restrictive laws regarding carrying firearms in public violated the 2nd Amendment, and court agreed.
To explain their reasoning, the majority cited the recent decisions in Heller and McDonald. Those two cases established the right of law-abiding adults to keep handguns in their homes for self-defense. In Peruta, though, the court determined that the citizens do NOT have a right to carry concealed weapons in public. Since citizens have a constitutional right to "bear" (or "carry") weapons for self-defense, but they DON'T have a right to carry concealed weapons in public, the court reasoned that they must have a meaningful opportunity to carry firearms openly in public places for their own protection. States can make some reasonable rules and regulations about carrying weapons in public, but they may not simply prohibit the practice.
The 9th Circuit sent the case back to the lower court in Hawaii for further proceedings consistent with the newly-announced rule. Now, the legal team for the state must decide whether or not to request an en banc ruling, where every judge on the circuit would have an opportunity to hear the matter. If the case is heard by a full panel of judges in the 9th Circuit, it is very likely that the ruling would be reversed again. Of course, that would inevitably lead to another appeal to the Supreme Court, where a conservative majority could reverse again and announce a nationwide right to openly carry handguns in public.
For now, this latest ruling from the 9th Circuit only narrowly applies to Hawaii's rules regarding the issuance of "open carry" licenses. It seems to open the door, though, to more challenges over California's restrictive regulations about carrying weapons in public (or in vehicles, etc.). Unlike Hawaii, California doesn't even allow law-abiding citizens to apply for a license to openly carry a firearm in public -- all "open carry" is completely banned in the Golden State. It is virtually impossible for the average citizen to obtain a concealed carry license in most parts of the state, too. If the ruling in Young withstands the next round(s) of appeals, that might change.
Stay tuned to see how this plays out.
If you or a loved one has questions about firearms and your rights in California, call us for a free attorney consultation. (714) 449-3335. Ask for John.
Thanks for reading.
Fullerton Gun Lawyer
No comments:
Post a Comment